Legal Cost Specialists
Our newly launched Legal Costs Blog branded range of t-shirts has been an instant hit with orders flying off the shelf. We are delighted to be able to announce that a further selection of designs is now available. As before, the t-shirts have our brand new Legal Costs Blog logo on the rear and one […]
More Legal Costs Blog branded t-shirts Read More »
I think we can all agree that the revocation of the Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations 2000 was a sad day for the legal costs world. Regrettably, the Jackson Costs Review did not recommend that these Regulations should be restored. The proposal to end recoverability of additional liabilities has much to commend it but the attractions
Revoke the Conditional Fee Agreements (Revocation) Regulations 2005 Read More »
(This post was written before the council of the Association of Law Costs Draftsmen responded to the post Costs Counsel v Costs Lawyers (click link) and should be read in conjunction with that. I haven’t felt it necessary to amend the content of this post.) I previously mentioned, in passing, that I am now a
Association of Law Costs Draftsmen shake-up Read More »
The following comes from the Association of Law Costs Draftmen‘s council: This is the collective response of the council of the ALCD to the posts made in response to the article Costs Counsel v Costs Lawyer [click link]. In view of the nature of the comments made, the Chairman intends also to make a number
Costs Counsel v Costs Lawyer – ALCD Responds Read More »
When After-the-Event insurance premiums became recoverable back in 2000, the Costs Practice Direction introduced the following rule as to what should be provided when serving a bill of costs: 32.5(2) – If the additional liability is an insurance premium: a copy of the insurance certificate showing whether the policy covers the receiving party’s own costs;
Defective ATE insurance certificates Read More »
Continuing with our occasional series of responses to the Jackson Costs Review from the “great and the good” in the costs world is Matthew Harman. Matthew is President of the Association of Law Costs Draftsmen, Costs Lawyer and Senior Partner at Matthew Harman & Partners. JACKSON – 6 MONTHS ON The Jackson report was published
Jackson Report – Matthew Harman responds Read More »
What grade of fee earner can be justified for a law costs draftsman drafting a bill of costs? Cook on Costs 2010, page 438, says this issue was discussed at a Costs Practitioners’ Group meeting at the SCCO “whose view was that while Grade D fee earners might be able to draw straightforward bills of
What grade fee earner for drafting a bill of costs? Read More »
I wonder whatever happened to that report. What was it called again? Oh, yes: Jackson LJ’s Review of Civil Litigation Costs. Probably sitting on a shelf somewhere gathering dust. Oh. Just a moment. What’s this Written Ministerial Statement just released today by Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Jonathan Djanogly MP): I am today announcing
Jackson Costs Report – "a matter of priority" Read More »
What grade of fee earner does a costs lawyer/law costs draftsman fall into? This is a different issue as to what grade can they justify on assessment, which I will deal with on another day. I recently commented on the subject of who qualifies as a Grade C fee earner. By way of a quick
What grade of fee earner is a costs lawyer or costs draftsman? Read More »
A recent edition of Costs Lawyer magazine contained an interview with the Association of Law Costs Draftsmen’s new chairman Iain Stark. In the interview he argues for costs lawyers to reclaim advocacy work on the basis that: “We created the mini costs industry for barristers. That was our own fault, predominantly because we didn’t have
Costs Counsel v Costs Lawyer Read More »